I wonder just how much pumping the aid dollars into local needs would actually help them. Problems like homelessness aren't going to be fixed with a quick cash injection.

Besides, domestic needs aside, what international implications would there be of the US not sending aid to a stricken nation after such a catastrophic natural disaster? I can't imagine the global response if the US said "Nope, actually we've got a few homeless here that we decided to give the money to instead".

I suppose the writer doesn't donate to any charities themselves unless every member of their family is entirely happy and problem-free...